as firmament, according to the firmamentum of the Vulgate. The word, however, probably means something spread out, a spread out cloth or curtain or carpet, so that the heavens are described not as a fixed vault, but as a curtain spread out above the earth, as the psalmist says (civ. 2): "Who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain." Of course, while retaining this poetical, pictorial expression which is natural to the Hebrew language, we must not conclude that Moses imagined the heavens were a vault or a canopy, although we do not indeed know anything to the contrary, and the question is quite unimportant.

Commentators inquire whether by heaven-for so God calls the canopy-we are here to understand the cœlum sidereum, or the cœlum aëreum, the starry sky or the atmosphere. I think that this question should be answered by another; did Moses distinguish between the starry sky and the atmosphere? I think not; at least there is nothing in the Hexameron which obliges us to go beyond the general and vague meaning of the word, which simply signifies what we see stretched out over the earth, in the apparent form of a vault or canopy, in short, the same which we also call by the perfectly vague word heaven.

One part of the great mass of waters mentioned in the description of chaos, in ver. 2, is lifted up on the second day from the earth, while the other part remains; a division is made between heavenly and earthly waters. What are we to understand by the waters above the firmament? Some very weighty authorities hold the theory that the waters of the chaotic state were so divided on the second day, that as on the third day

the earth was formed from the lower waters, so the upper waters afforded the substance for the formation of the heavenly bodies which appeared on the fourth day.' The other theory is, however, undoubtedly the true one, namely, that the water above the firmament is what forms the clouds; in short, the work of the second day was the formation of the atmosphere. Part of the water which formed the surface of the earth in its chaotic state rises in mists from the earth, and forms the atmosphere which surrounds it.

It will not be necessary to enumerate all the reasons which tell in favour of this theory and against the other, if any one can be found which is sufficient to decide the point in question. Nor will this be difficult. Moses had no occasion to tell us how and of what the stars were formed. For, as he intended to write a geogony, not a cosmogony, as I have already shown, it was not necessary that he should say anything about the stars except in so far as they are connected with the earth; and he does this in describing the fourth day. On the other hand, his account would have been strikingly incomplete if he had not spoken of the atmosphere, and specially of the clouds; because the rain, which, according to the popular view and the Bible, falls from the clouds, is essentially necessary for the growth of vegetation, and in the Hexameron the latter is brought into close connection with man. We therefore

1 See Delitzsch in the first editions of his Commentary on Genesis (in the 4th ed., p. 38, he explains the "meteoric" water correctly), and Kurtz in the first editions of Bibel und Astronomie (in the latter editions he gives up the theory). Similarly Baltzer, Bibel Schöpfungsgesch. p. 315. Zollmann, Bibel und Natur, p. 94.

maintain that the work of the second day was the creation of the atmosphere.

As I have already observed, there is a good reason for the absence of the remark: "And God saw that it was good," at the close of the second day. The work of this day was not complete in itself, and its result was not perfected, for heaven still wanted the stars, and earth the division between water and land. The divine work, therefore, at the point which it has reached on the second day, is not yet good; i.e. the divine idea has not yet been adequately realized— that is, reserved for the next day.

I now come to the third day. Its work is divided. into two parts. First of all the water and land are separated; vers. 9 and 10: "And God said, Let the water under the heaven be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear, and it was so. And God called the dry land earth, and the gathering together of the waters called He seas; and God saw that it was good." The fact that the portions of the earth's surface, which now appear as separated into solid and fluid, have names given to them, show, as has been said, that God has now caused to exist the definite condition which man calls "land and sea." As the relation of succession has been definitely appointed for light and darkness, so the relation of juxtaposition has been definitely appointed for water and land. With regard to the translation here "seas," in the Hebrew text we find the plural "jammim," which has been preserved in the Vulgate "maria" [and also in our version "seas"]. But the plural is, as Delitzsch observes, not numerical but intensive: it denotes the ocean, or the idea which

we form of the word sea when we use it in contrast to land; while the singular would mean one single sea. It will not surprise you that the streams which flow into the sea, and the lakes and inland seas which are like scattered portions of the ocean, should not be mentioned here. It is only the separation of water and land as a whole which is in question.

If we compare the condition of the earth now with that in which it was before the first day, we shall more clearly understand the description of the earlier condition. The dry land has now appeared, whereas formerly the surface of the earth was described as "Th'hom" and "majim,” an immense mass of waters. It is now light; the mass of waters was covered with darkness: these two characteristics of chaos are therefore removed. Only the third remains; the earth was without form and void, it is so still, and this state must be altered. God begins this work on the third day, for the second work of the third day is the bringing forth of vegetation.

1

Vers. 11-13: "And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit-tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth and it was so.1 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the third day."

The words "upon the earth" are a clearer definition of the foregoing: the earth is to bring forth the three classes of plants upon the earth, that is, as clothing for herself. See Delitzsch, Genesis, p. 93. Dillmann, Genesis, p. 28, explains it differently, "(fruit) whose seed is in itself (is for reproduction) upon the earth.”

S. Thomas Aquinas, following S. Augustine, points out that the bringing forth of vegetation is quite rightly mentioned as part of the work of the third day. "The creation of the plants is considered as part of the formation of the earth," he says, "because they are immoveably fixed in the earth.”1 Kurtz expresses the same thought in these words: "The vegetable world, fast rooted in its native soil, and covering its nakedness with a beautiful garment, has no separate or individual existence. Its creation, therefore, belongs to the work of the same day which gave free existence to the land to which it is fast bound." On the other hand, the two connected works of the separation of water and land, and the clothing of the land with vegetation, are marked as separate works in spite of their connection, because in the account of the work of the third day it is twice said "and God said," and twice and God saw that it was good." "Itaque," says S. Augustine, "et uno die ista junguntur et iteratis verbis Dei distinguuntur ab invicem."2

We have already spoken of the division of the plants.3 The expression "herbs and trees after their kind," shows that God caused various kinds of plants to spring forth-that is, different genera and species, not one kind only. It is not without reason that Moses says that God created seed-bearing herbs and treesthat is, that He gave the power of reproduction to the plants which He had first created, and that therefore the present vegetable world is to be considered as the